linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Don't report L1 BTB MCA errors on some Family 17h models

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 22 Mar 2019 21:55:00 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
Cc:     "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "rafal@...ecki.pl" <rafal@...ecki.pl>,
        "clemej@...il.com" <clemej@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Don't report L1 BTB MCA errors on
 some Family 17h models

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 08:37:08PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> Sorry, I forgot to mention this. I went with "filter_mce_amd" because
> amd_filter_mce() is already defined in edac/mce_amd.c and there was
> a conflict when building. Is there another way to avoid these naming
> conflicts?

Yuck, we're clearly filtering too much. :)

So let's rename that amd_filter_mce() to something else since it is
static and only used in that file. Maybe something like

        if (ignore_mce(m))
                return NOTIFY_STOP;

so that we can keep the "filter" notion all reserved to the core MCA
code and there's no confusion.

And then amd_filter_mce() is free to be used in the core code.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.